What a difference a few weeks makes.
Just over a month ago president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was castigating the Chinese government over its brutal crackdown on Tibetan protesters and then savaged Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) for comparing Taiwan to Tibet. One could reasonably believe that this party of pro-China ideologues that lost power in 2000 had turned over a new leaf.
But that was before the election. Now that the party has executive power safely back in its grasp and an undeservedly large legislative majority to boot, the true nature of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is once again beginning to seep through the cracks.
First there was KMT Legislator Liao Wan-ju (廖婉汝), who — following protests here — suggested that Tibetan supporters had been mobilized by the Ministry of National Defense’s Military Intelligence Bureau.
Then last week, when the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus tried to push through a resolution in the legislature condemning the Chinese government for the crackdown, the KMT caucus decided to use its majority to back its own watered-down version which contributed little more than verbal fluff about “protecting human rights in Tibet.”
On Tuesday the party’s Taipei City councilors followed suit, postponing indefinitely a debate on establishing March 10 as “Tibet Day” which would have been a mark of respect following the violence.
What a pity that the majority of KMT members don’t share Ma’s apparently progressive views and are instead willing to bend over backwards to placate Beijing’s bullies.
But one must not forget that the KMT was and is organizationally Leninist, made up of autocrats, many of whom have more in common with the thugs in Zhongnanhai than the peace-loving Buddhists of Tibet. Indeed, many of them only got where they are today by clinging to the coattails of a dictator, so it should not be surprising when they come down on the side of the Chinese.
Unfortunately, the actions of the party’s councilors and, more importantly, its legislators, is more evidence — if any was needed following Ma’s woefully inadequate stint as party chairman — that the party’s main vote-winner is a breed apart from most party members.
Some people who voted for Ma on his message of change are likely to be in for a shock as KMT legislators demonstrate their brazen disregard for public opinion and begin to push pork-barrel bills that they simply couldn’t have gotten away with in previous legislatures.
In fact, this has already begun.
A couple of weeks ago the legislature began review of amendments proposed by KMT legislators Yang Chiung-ying (楊瓊瓔), Chu Fong-chi (朱鳳芝) and Ting Shou-chung (丁守中) that will double the benefits given to traditionally pro-KMT village and borough chiefs nationwide, all at the taxpayers’ expense.
And then there are the proposed amendments to the Statute Governing Reconstruction of Old Military Dependents’ Villages (國軍老舊眷村改建條例) that will benefit the families of KMT military veterans to the tune of around NT$1.32 trillion (US$40.6 billion) if (or should one say when) it passes.
Is this the kind of government for “all the people” that those who voted for Ma expected?
The KMT’s Jekyll and Hyde attitude to the Tibetan issue, as unimportant as it may be to many Taiwanese, is a taste of what is to come as the new president struggles to curb the excesses of a legislature intoxicated with its own power.
Ma will need every ounce of strength he has if he is to tame the dragon and achieve half of what he promised.
We wish him luck.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS